Interested in getting a short overview of the latest geospatial papers and datasets each week?
Subscribe to the Spatial Edge newsletter: yohan.so
@yohan.so.bsky.social
Sharing insights from the intersection of geospatial data science and economics | PhD in Economic Geography from LSE | Data Scientist at ADB. Views are my own. Newsletter: http://spatialedge.co
Interested in getting a short overview of the latest geospatial papers and datasets each week?
Subscribe to the Spatial Edge newsletter: yohan.so
๐๐น;๐ฑ๐ฟ
1. nightlights can capture certain elements of consumption and production
2. the level of granularity when using nightlights really matters
๐ง๐ต๐ฒ ๐ธ๐ฒ๐ ๐๐ฎ๐ธ๐ฒ๐ฎ๐๐ฎ๐:
The more you zoom in, the bigger these spatial mismatches between daytime and nighttime economic activity become.
This underrepresentation occurs even if:
โข these areas generate a lot more economic activity (e.g. financial districts), compared to
โข areas bustling with bars and restaurants
These nightlife areas tend to be overestimated in nightlights data.
As a result, it's likely that I:
โข work during the day in one 500m2 pixel and
โข spend money in a different pixel at night.
This implies that pixels with higher daytime economic activity will be systematically underrepresented in nightlights data.
This creates a discrepancy between areas where economic activity is generated during the day (London) vs at night (Essex).
With nightlights we can zoom into areas as small as 500m2.
In this example, the economic activity from my job in London doesn't get picked up by nightlights.
However, the places where I spend money at night in Essex, like restaurants, do light up and are visible from space.
2. Spatial Mismatches
Imagine I work in London but live in Essex, an hour away.
My work (i.e. production) contributes to London's economy.
But when I spend time in Essex, like eating out at night, that's where my consumption mainly happens.
The bottom line:
Nightlights can capture certain elements of consumption AND production.
So when doing an analysis using nightlights, we need to know the composition of production and consumption.
This is important to avoid double counting.
See this image of the Pilbara region in Australia
Here we see:
1. lights generated from mines being lit up at night (i.e. production-based economic activity), AND
2. lights generated by mining staff who are eating out at night (e.g. consumption-based economic activity).
But the reality is a bit more complex.
Nightlights can capture some production-related activities.
E.g. nighttime construction and nighttime mining.
However, we need to be careful about double counting.
E.g. combining production values with income and consumption figures without accounting for overlaps could distort things.
Henderson et al., essentially view nightlights as a measure of nighttime consumption:
However, GDP is typically measured in three ways:
1. Adding up all of the consumption in an economy
2. Adding up all of the income earned in an economy
3. Adding up the value of all things produced in an economy
For an entire country, these should equal one another.
1. Economic Activity
Itโs vague to say nightlights capture โeconomic activityโ.
What ๐๐ญ๐๐๐ฉ๐ก๐ฎ do we mean by economic activity?
The most popular paper on nightlights and economic activity is Henderson et al. (2012).
It uses nightlights as a proxy for real GDP growth.
If you're using nightlights you need to know about two things:
1. What ๐ฉ๐ฎ๐ฅ๐ of economic activity it captures, and
2. ๐๐ฅ๐๐ฉ๐๐๐ก ๐ข๐๐จ๐ข๐๐ฉ๐๐๐๐จ
Here's the breakdown (in simple terms):
Interested in getting a short overview of the latest geospatial papers and datasets each week?
Subscribe to the Spatial Edge newsletter: yohan.so
So: while AI is clearly going to play a massive role in geospatial analysis going forward, could it actually be overhyped?
28.04.2025 11:29 โ ๐ 0 ๐ 0 ๐ฌ 1 ๐ 0๐ช๐ต๐ ๐๐ต๐ถ๐ ๐ฎ๐น๐น ๐บ๐ฎ๐๐๐ฒ๐ฟ๐
At the end of the day, autonomous GIS could make spatial analysis:
โข More accessible to non-experts.
โข Faster and more scalable.
โข Capable of generating new insights.
It also forces GIScience to rethink education, ethics, and what it means to โknowโ geography
โข Modeling: Automating complex analysis like disease spread or flood risk still requires human judgment.
โข Trust and ethics: Who is responsible if a model makes a bad call? How do we ensure fairness?
However, several big hurdles remain:
โข LLMs lack of GIS-specific knowledge (e.g., projections, spatial joins).
โข Skills gap: LLMs donโt always know what tools to use or how to handle large files.
โข Continuous learning: Most models canโt improve themselves after deployment.
โข ๐๐๐ -๐๐ฎ๐: Makes maps iteratively and improves them based on its own visual critique.
โข ๐๐๐ฆ ๐๐ผ๐ฝ๐ถ๐น๐ผ๐: Helps QGIS users do analysis more efficiently.
๐ช๐ต๐ฎ๐ ๐๐ฎ๐ป ๐๐ ๐๐ผ ๐ง๐ผ๐ฑ๐ฎ๐?
The authors provide working examples:
โข ๐๐๐ -๐๐ถ๐ป๐ฑ: Automatically finds and downloads the right geospatial data.
โข ๐๐๐ -๐๐ฒ๐ผ: Runs a complete spatial analysisโe.g., walkability around schoolsโby creating code and visualizing results.
๐ฆ๐ฐ๐ฎ๐น๐ฒ๐ ๐ผ๐ณ ๐ข๐ฝ๐ฒ๐ฟ๐ฎ๐๐ถ๐ผ๐ป
There are three technical scales:
1. Local: Runs on a single machine
2. Centralized: Uses cloud computing to handle larger tasks.
3. Infrastructure-scale: Distributed systems for massive analysis, possibly run by governments or research institutions.
๐๐ผ๐ ๐๐ ๐๐ ๐๐ฒ๐ถ๐ป๐ด ๐๐๐ถ๐น๐?
The core of an autonomous GIS is the โdecision coreโ. This is typically an LLM that:
โข Reads your question.
โข Plans a solution.
โข Finds and cleans the data.
โข Runs the analysis (e.g., in Python or GIS software).
โข Presents results (maps, stats, reports).
Most current prototypes are at Level 2.
I.e. they can follow instructions, create workflows, and run them, but need help getting the right data or interpreting results.
๐๐ฒ๐๐ฒ๐น ๐ฎ: Generates and runs workflows, but still needs human-provided data.
๐๐ฒ๐๐ฒ๐น ๐ฏ: Selects and prepares its own data.
๐๐ฒ๐๐ฒ๐น ๐ฐ: Understands and refines results without help.
๐๐ฒ๐๐ฒ๐น ๐ฑ: Fully independent, learns from experience, and adapts over time.
๐๐ฒ๐๐ฒ๐น๐ ๐ผ๐ณ ๐๐๐๐ผ๐ป๐ผ๐บ๐
Autonomous GIS can be built gradually. The authors define five levels:
๐๐ฒ๐๐ฒ๐น ๐ฌ: Everything is manual โ traditional GIS.
๐๐ฒ๐๐ฒ๐น ๐ญ: Automates repetitive tasks, but a human sets them up.
๐ฏ. ๐ฆ๐ฒ๐น๐ณ-๐๐ฒ๐ฟ๐ถ๐ณ๐๐ถ๐ป๐ด โ It checks its own work step by step and ensures results are reasonable.
๐ฐ. ๐ฆ๐ฒ๐น๐ณ-๐ผ๐ฟ๐ด๐ฎ๐ป๐ถ๐๐ถ๐ป๐ด โ It manages time, data, compute power, and even collaborates with other agents.
๐ฑ. ๐ฆ๐ฒ๐น๐ณ-๐ด๐ฟ๐ผ๐๐ถ๐ป๐ด โ It learns from experience and gets better.
There are 5 goals for autonomous GIS:
๐ญ. ๐ฆ๐ฒ๐น๐ณ-๐ด๐ฒ๐ป๐ฒ๐ฟ๐ฎ๐๐ถ๐ป๐ด โ It creates ideas, workflows, code, and insights on its own.
๐ฎ. ๐ฆ๐ฒ๐น๐ณ-๐ฒ๐
๐ฒ๐ฐ๐๐๐ถ๐ป๐ด โ It can run the tasks (e.g., calculating distances, drawing maps).
The emergence of LLMs, has made this possible. These models can:
โข Interpret instructions in natural language.
โข Generate workflows and code.
โข Work iteratively to refine outputs.
This opens the door to GIS reasons and adapts.